All-Star Only Seniors Can Expose Midriff???

[cheercurl]

Being in the USASF is a choice? If you want to go to Worlds it's not...

You have painfully insulted me. Voicing an opinion on a public forum is action. Insinuating that it is whining is an easy way to cage anyone with an opposing opinion into a bunch of whining babies and since they don't put up they should shut up.

You have no sympathy? Like I care if you do...I have an opinion, I have a right to express it. I have a forum to do it and I will. You on the other hand don't seem to post here much. Is this your second board name that maybe you are hiding behind? At least I have the guts to say what I am thinking in a respectful way. You don't have to agree with my opinion...you don't have to like it but calling my point of view whiney is offensive.

You don't know me. You don't know what actions I have taken so don't assume you do. Saying ...just choose not to be a part of the USASF is unrealistic and ridiculous because whether anyone likes it or not they are the sun and we all orbit around them. That is a done deal.

I am going to put this in caps because I want to make sure you hear this. I UNDERSTAND WHY THEY FELT THE NEED FOR A UNIFORM "RULING". I JUST DON'T AGREE WITH HOW THEY WENT ABOUT IT. I VOICED AN ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO ---->NOT ANARCHY ...LETS REVOLT AND TURN THE USASF OVER TO THE CHEERCURL DEMOCRACY...although that does have a nice ring to it. If it sounds like I am mad it is because I am....really mad.

 

[ASCheerMan]

Go ahead USASF, the door has opened and nobody is gonna slam it shut. You know people will b***tch and moan over each of your upcoming dictates, but nobody will really do anything to stop you.

I do want to clarify that even though this policy was released the same day the scandalous Level 5 Tumbling Rule changes were released, the Image Policy followed a formal process that was very inclusive of the voice of the industry. In fact, many of us were upset that the two were put forward on the same day, as I think the Rules Changes helped give the Image Policy a blacker eyes than it deserved.
The Image Policy was created by a subcomittee of the National Advisory Board (The NAB is committee of representatives elected by their peers: coaches, event producers and industry providers). The Image Subcomittee (made up of 80% coaches) developed the policy and bounced it off the Image Council (representatives of the Industry Providers (i.e. shoe manufacturers, makeup companies, etc), the USASF Rules Committee, and the NACCC Executive Committee.
I can understand the frustration associated with feeling like a voice wasn't heard or given its due attention. As Americans, we don't get a chance to vote on every single decision and policy our government puts forward because we rely on the elected officials to represent us and protect us when making those decisions. The same philosophy was put forth in this scenario.
I understand that you were speaking figuratively when you referred to the USASF as "you" in "nobody will do anything to stop you!" but I do want to clarify that 'you' refers to a much broader cross section of the participating Coaches and Event Producers than you may realize.

 

[MomMomMamaMom]

Just out of curiosity, why is the image council made up of the industry providers? I'm having difficulty with the fact that thereis a profit margin to be considered. I guess, when it comes dwn to it almost everyone mentioned above is making (or losing) $ in te industry itself, but I am not getting why the manufacturers have a say in it? Can you please explain?

 

[kristenthegreat]

I do want to clarify that even though this policy was released the same day the scandalous Level 5 Tumbling Rule changes were released, the Image Policy followed a formal process that was very inclusive of the voice of the industry. In fact, many of us were upset that the two were put forward on the same day, as I think the Rules Changes helped give the Image Policy a blacker eyes than it deserved.
The Image Policy was created by a subcomittee of the National Advisory Board (The NAB is committee of representatives elected by their peers: coaches, event producers and industry providers). The Image Subcomittee (made up of 80% coaches) developed the policy and bounced it off the Image Council (representatives of the Industry Providers (i.e. shoe manufacturers, makeup companies, etc), the USASF Rules Committee, and the NACCC Executive Committee.
I can understand the frustration associated with feeling like a voice wasn't heard or given its due attention. As Americans, we don't get a chance to vote on every single decision and policy our government puts forward because we rely on the elected officials to represent us and protect us when making those decisions. The same philosophy was put forth in this scenario.
I understand that you were speaking figuratively when you referred to the USASF as "you" in "nobody will do anything to stop you!" but I do want to clarify that 'you' refers to a much broader cross section of the participating Coaches and Event Producers than you may realize.

And I don't suppose you'd be able to release the names of those coaches who made up that Image Subcommittee?

So, the NAB created the Image Subcommittee. Was that a volunteer process or were they asked? Did everyone who was asked agree to take part, or did others decline? Were some members of some of the other committees (NAB, NACCC, etc) also members of this Image Subcommittee? I'm trying to get a better feel for how all this went down, and since you're the only person who volunteered such info, you get to be the person to ask

 

[ASCheerMan]

Just out of curiosity, why is the image council made up of the industry providers? I'm having difficulty with the fact that thereis a profit margin to be considered. I guess, when it comes dwn to it almost everyone mentioned above is making (or losing) $ in te industry itself, but I am not getting why the manufacturers have a say in it? Can you please explain?

The Image Council was originally brought in to simply brainstorm on what ideas they had on improving the image. It was to help them recognize that they have a responsibility to our sport.

We also wanted to avoid potentially negative impact the policy would have on our stakeholders. The Image Council does make a living on their business and we wanted to make sure their voice was at least heard or considered when formulating a timeline for release. Not that they had the power to veto any idea. But if we had two options in front of us and both had the desired effect but Option A negatively affected their bottom line and Option B changed nothing about their bottom line, then it made more sense to go with B.

And finally, as the experts in their field and of their business, they helped on the wordsmithing of the actual policy to make sure it was relevant to the products affected.

 

[MomMomMamaMom]

The Image Council was originally brought in to simply brainstorm on what ideas they had on improving the image. It was to help them recognize that they have a responsibility to our sport.

We also wanted to avoid potentially negative impact the policy would have on our stakeholders. The Image Council does make a living on their business and we wanted to make sure their voice was at least heard or considered when formulating a timeline for release. Not that they had the power to veto any idea. But if we had two options in front of us and both had the desired effect but Option A negatively affected their bottom line and Option B changed nothing about their bottom line, then it made more sense to go with B.

And finally, as the experts in their field and of their business, they helped on the wordsmithing of the actual policy to make sure it was relevant to the products affected.

Fair enough. Thanks for he explanation. In other sports is this standard practice?

 

[ASCheerMan]

Fair enough. Thanks for he explanation. In other sports is this standard practice?

I have no idea.

 

[FamousxMindset]

With little girls growing up too fast already, Kudos to the USAF for enforcing such a rule. We unfortunately every person at a cheerleading competition isn't there for the right reason. So if all it takes to keep my child a child is a full top? IM ALL FOR IT.

 

[newcheerdad]

There are a few points I want to make here, to clarify my position:

I support the USASF coming up with a rule regarding uniforms that's clear and well-defined. That does not mean that I completely agree with every specific element of the rule, nor is that an implicit endorsement of how the USASF went about creating that rule. Is @ASCheerMan's description of the decision-making process standard operating procedure for other sports? It's probably closer than you think. But I think the core issue may be more about how these committees and groups are constituted (are they representative of the cheer industry as a whole) than of the process itself.

Where I split from some folks are in two key points:

1. The USASF, as the defacto governing body for all-star cheer, is absolutely within their rights to come up with rules regarding uniforms. Period. We can debate the merits of the rule or the process by which the rule was created - but people can spare me the complaints about "their rights being taken away" or other hyperbole. It's a rule about uniforms, not the beginnings of a police state.

2. Like any other rule, the wording has to be clear and concise, with objective standards as to what constitutes a legal uniform. The second you make it a judgement call on the part of a particular competition or event producer, you open up a huge can of worms. I'm certified to referee high school soccer, and there are far more strict rules about the types of uniforms and equipment kids can wear - so this is not some anomaly.

 

[MomMomMamaMom]

There are a few points I want to make here, to clarify my position:

I support the USASF coming up with a rule regarding uniforms that's clear and well-defined. That does not mean that I completely agree with every specific element of the rule, nor is that an implicit endorsement of how the USASF went about creating that rule. Is @ASCheerMan's description of the decision-making process standard operating procedure for other sports? It's probably closer than you think. But I think the core issue may be more about how these committees and groups are constituted (are they representative of the cheer industry as a whole) than of the process itself.

Where I split from some folks are in two key points:

1. The USASF, as the defacto governing body for all-star cheer, is absolutely within their rights to come up with rules regarding uniforms. Period. We can debate the merits of the rule or the process by which the rule was created - but people can spare me the complaints about "their rights being taken away" or other hyperbole. It's a rule about uniforms, not the beginnings of a police state.

2. Like any other rule, the wording has to be clear and concise, with objective standards as to what constitutes a legal uniform. The second you make it a judgement call on the part of a particular competition or event producer, you open up a huge can of worms. I'm certified to referee high school soccer, and there are far more strict rules about the types of uniforms and equipment kids can wear - so this is not some anomaly.

I agree....I am personally debating the quality of the rules that are going into effect...and wether or not they meet any of the stated objectives. I think it behooves the USASF to regulate as little as they can when it comes to uniforms, not withstanding the right to maintain an appropriate image. I can see that there was a significant amount of compromise (ie revising the rule to not Include Seniors) which may account for some of the apparent inconsistencies. So this might be as good as it gets. But if the goal is to legitimize the sport I think image problems are not what I would have started with.

 

[HitPullCheer]

It's a freaking uniform. Whether its a crop top or a full length uniform, it is still the same sport.

 

[coachrah]

With little girls growing up too fast already, Kudos to the USAF for enforcing such a rule. We unfortunately every person at a cheerleading competition isn't there for the right reason. So if all it takes to keep my child a child is a full top? IM ALL FOR IT.

I would give kudos if the "governing body" had mandatory background checks...that would be the first step in keeping your child safe.

 

[FamousxMindset]

I would give kudos if the "governing body" had mandatory background checks...that would be the first step in keeping your child safe.

Back ground checks for spectators?

 

[Mom2Cheergirls]

Being in the USASF is a choice? If you want to go to Worlds it's not...

You have painfully insulted me. Voicing an opinion on a public forum is action. Insinuating that it is whining is an easy way to cage anyone with an opposing opinion into a bunch of whining babies and since they don't put up they should shut up.

You have no sympathy? Like I care if you do...I have an opinion, I have a right to express it. I have a forum to do it and I will. You on the other hand don't seem to post here much. Is this your second board name that maybe you are hiding behind? At least I have the guts to say what I am thinking in a respectful way. You don't have to agree with my opinion...you don't have to like it but calling my point of view whiney is offensive.

You don't know me. You don't know what actions I have taken so don't assume you do. Saying ...just choose not to be a part of the USASF is unrealistic and ridiculous because whether anyone likes it or not they are the sun and we all orbit around them. That is a done deal.

I am going to put this in caps because I want to make sure you hear this. I UNDERSTAND WHY THEY FELT THE NEED FOR A UNIFORM "RULING". I JUST DON'T AGREE WITH HOW THEY WENT ABOUT IT. I VOICED AN ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO ---->NOT ANARCHY ...LETS REVOLT AND TURN THE USASF OVER TO THE CHEERCURL DEMOCRACY...although that does have a nice ring to it. If it sounds like I am mad it is because I am....really mad.

I am sorry if I painfully insulted you but complaining on a forum is not action it it sitting on your chair typing to others who read this thread. Your rights can't be taken from you if you make the choice to join a group and must follow within the rules in how that organization is run. You can not like how you are represented and want to change it but many are making it sound like they suddenly pulled representation that was previously in place and that is not the case. I applaud you if you are doing more than that and hope that others follow suit if they feel so strongly that they are not being represented in this organization. As I have said I feel the USASF should have greater representation from parents, gym owners, coaches, and older cheerleaders - but I know that this is not how it is and I can not complain about my rights and choices being taken when the way USASF works is already set in place.
I hide behind nothing and the number of posts I have compared to yours does not have any matter on how much I know about an issue or care about it.
You may not agree how the ruling went down. But you make it sound like they did not follow what there governing charter states and as far as I can see they were well within their rights and if anything did more than required. No one said every organization was a full democracy when you join a group that all ready has a governing body you can not like how things go down but your rights aren't trampled as long as they follow their charter.
The reason I keep mention leaving the USASF is because even Coach Troy mentioned at one point that was something that gyms should do and show how free commerce can take effect. If it is your belief that the majority of gyms are against this then band together and create an alternative organization - has been done with other groups.

 

[coachrah]

I do want to clarify that even though this policy was released the same day the scandalous Level 5 Tumbling Rule changes were released, the Image Policy followed a formal process that was very inclusive of the voice of the industry. In fact, many of us were upset that the two were put forward on the same day, as I think the Rules Changes helped give the Image Policy a blacker eyes than it deserved.
The Image Policy was created by a subcomittee of the National Advisory Board (The NAB is committee of representatives elected by their peers: coaches, event producers and industry providers). The Image Subcomittee (made up of 80% coaches) developed the policy and bounced it off the Image Council (representatives of the Industry Providers (i.e. shoe manufacturers, makeup companies, etc), the USASF Rules Committee, and the NACCC Executive Committee.
I can understand the frustration associated with feeling like a voice wasn't heard or given its due attention. As Americans, we don't get a chance to vote on every single decision and policy our government puts forward because we rely on the elected officials to represent us and protect us when making those decisions. The same philosophy was put forth in this scenario.
I understand that you were speaking figuratively when you referred to the USASF as "you" in "nobody will do anything to stop you!" but I do want to clarify that 'you' refers to a much broader cross section of the participating Coaches and Event Producers than you may realize.

The "scandalous" tumbling rules for Level 5 were met with over 7,000 signatures on change.org. So are you verifying the Image Policy had a formal process but the tumbling rules were "scandoulous" and did not follow a formal process?